患者选择对抑郁症、焦虑症和饮食失调患者的摄取、依从性和结局的影响:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 5.5 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Psychological Medicine Pub Date : 2025-02-07 DOI:10.1017/S0033291725000066
Catherine Johnson, Marcela Radunz, Jake Linardon, Matthew Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, Paul Williamson, Tracey D Wade
{"title":"患者选择对抑郁症、焦虑症和饮食失调患者的摄取、依从性和结局的影响:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Catherine Johnson, Marcela Radunz, Jake Linardon, Matthew Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, Paul Williamson, Tracey D Wade","doi":"10.1017/S0033291725000066","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Growing evidence highlights the critical role of patient choice of treatment, with significant benefits for outcomes found in some studies. While four meta-analyses have previously examined the association between treatment choice and outcomes in mental health, robust conclusions have been limited by the inclusion of studies with biased preference trial designs. The current systematic review included 30 studies across three common and frequently comorbid mental health disorders (depression <i>N</i> = 23; anxiety, <i>N</i> = 5; eating disorders, <i>N</i> = 2) including 7055 participants (<i>M</i><sub>age</sub> 42.5 years, SD 11.7; 69.5% female). Treatment choice most often occurred between psychotherapy and antidepressant medication (43.3%), followed by choice between two different forms of psychotherapy, or elements within psychotherapy (36.7%). There were insufficient studies with stringent designs to conduct meta-analyses for anxiety or eating disorders as outcomes, or for treatment uptake. Treatment choice significantly improved outcomes for depression (<i>d</i> = 0.17, <i>n</i> = 18) and decreased therapy dropout, both in a combined sample targeting depression (<i>n</i> = 12), anxiety (<i>n</i> = 4) and eating disorders (<i>n</i> = 1; OR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.17, 1.83), and in a smaller sample of the depression studies alone (OR = 1.65, 95% CI: 1.05, 2.59). All studies evaluated the impact of adults making treatment choices with none examining the effect of choice in adolescents. Clear directions in future research are indicated, in terms of designing studies that can adequately test the treatment choice and outcome association in anxiety and eating disorder treatment, and in youth.</p>","PeriodicalId":20891,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Medicine","volume":"55 ","pages":"e32"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12017370/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The impact of patient choice on uptake, adherence, and outcomes across depression, anxiety, and eating disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Catherine Johnson, Marcela Radunz, Jake Linardon, Matthew Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, Paul Williamson, Tracey D Wade\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0033291725000066\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Growing evidence highlights the critical role of patient choice of treatment, with significant benefits for outcomes found in some studies. While four meta-analyses have previously examined the association between treatment choice and outcomes in mental health, robust conclusions have been limited by the inclusion of studies with biased preference trial designs. The current systematic review included 30 studies across three common and frequently comorbid mental health disorders (depression <i>N</i> = 23; anxiety, <i>N</i> = 5; eating disorders, <i>N</i> = 2) including 7055 participants (<i>M</i><sub>age</sub> 42.5 years, SD 11.7; 69.5% female). Treatment choice most often occurred between psychotherapy and antidepressant medication (43.3%), followed by choice between two different forms of psychotherapy, or elements within psychotherapy (36.7%). There were insufficient studies with stringent designs to conduct meta-analyses for anxiety or eating disorders as outcomes, or for treatment uptake. Treatment choice significantly improved outcomes for depression (<i>d</i> = 0.17, <i>n</i> = 18) and decreased therapy dropout, both in a combined sample targeting depression (<i>n</i> = 12), anxiety (<i>n</i> = 4) and eating disorders (<i>n</i> = 1; OR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.17, 1.83), and in a smaller sample of the depression studies alone (OR = 1.65, 95% CI: 1.05, 2.59). All studies evaluated the impact of adults making treatment choices with none examining the effect of choice in adolescents. Clear directions in future research are indicated, in terms of designing studies that can adequately test the treatment choice and outcome association in anxiety and eating disorder treatment, and in youth.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20891,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychological Medicine\",\"volume\":\"55 \",\"pages\":\"e32\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12017370/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychological Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291725000066\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291725000066","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

越来越多的证据强调了患者选择治疗的关键作用,在一些研究中发现了显著的益处。虽然先前有四项荟萃分析研究了治疗选择与心理健康结果之间的关系,但由于纳入了有偏见偏好试验设计的研究,强有力的结论受到限制。目前的系统综述包括30项研究,涉及三种常见和经常共病的精神健康障碍(抑郁症N = 23;焦虑,N = 5;饮食失调,N = 2),包括7055名参与者(年龄42.5岁,SD 11.7;69.5%的女性)。治疗选择最常发生在心理治疗和抗抑郁药物之间(43.3%),其次是两种不同形式的心理治疗或心理治疗中的元素之间的选择(36.7%)。没有足够的严格设计的研究将焦虑或饮食失调作为结果或治疗吸收进行荟萃分析。在针对抑郁症(n = 12)、焦虑(n = 4)和饮食失调(n = 1)的联合样本中,治疗选择显著改善了抑郁症的结局(d = 0.17, n = 18),并减少了治疗中途退出;OR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.17, 1.83),而在一个较小的抑郁症研究样本中(OR = 1.65, 95% CI: 1.05, 2.59)。所有的研究都评估了成年人做出治疗选择的影响,没有一个研究检查了选择对青少年的影响。在设计研究方面,明确了未来的研究方向,可以充分测试焦虑和饮食障碍治疗的治疗选择和结果的关联,以及在青少年中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The impact of patient choice on uptake, adherence, and outcomes across depression, anxiety, and eating disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Growing evidence highlights the critical role of patient choice of treatment, with significant benefits for outcomes found in some studies. While four meta-analyses have previously examined the association between treatment choice and outcomes in mental health, robust conclusions have been limited by the inclusion of studies with biased preference trial designs. The current systematic review included 30 studies across three common and frequently comorbid mental health disorders (depression N = 23; anxiety, N = 5; eating disorders, N = 2) including 7055 participants (Mage 42.5 years, SD 11.7; 69.5% female). Treatment choice most often occurred between psychotherapy and antidepressant medication (43.3%), followed by choice between two different forms of psychotherapy, or elements within psychotherapy (36.7%). There were insufficient studies with stringent designs to conduct meta-analyses for anxiety or eating disorders as outcomes, or for treatment uptake. Treatment choice significantly improved outcomes for depression (d = 0.17, n = 18) and decreased therapy dropout, both in a combined sample targeting depression (n = 12), anxiety (n = 4) and eating disorders (n = 1; OR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.17, 1.83), and in a smaller sample of the depression studies alone (OR = 1.65, 95% CI: 1.05, 2.59). All studies evaluated the impact of adults making treatment choices with none examining the effect of choice in adolescents. Clear directions in future research are indicated, in terms of designing studies that can adequately test the treatment choice and outcome association in anxiety and eating disorder treatment, and in youth.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Psychological Medicine
Psychological Medicine 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
4.30%
发文量
711
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Now in its fifth decade of publication, Psychological Medicine is a leading international journal in the fields of psychiatry, related aspects of psychology and basic sciences. From 2014, there are 16 issues a year, each featuring original articles reporting key research being undertaken worldwide, together with shorter editorials by distinguished scholars and an important book review section. The journal''s success is clearly demonstrated by a consistently high impact factor.
期刊最新文献
Changes in cannabis potency and cannabis-related psychiatric harms: a 23-year ecological study in Denmark. Distinct and common subcortical functional connectivity revealed across three major psychiatric disorders. Linking brain structure to stress reactivity: cingulate surface area predicts acute cortisol responses - CORRIGENDUM. Modulating empathy with tDCS: dissociable roles of rTPJ and lDLPFC. The effects of rTMS over orbitofrontal cortex on cognitive functions in first-episode schizophrenia.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1